Tim Ray

I’m not putting words in your mouth, I’m following your logic to its conclusion. And ironically, you just made my point for me. You said man does not fulfill covenant, God does. Exactly. So if God made an unconditional covenant with Abraham, then it does not rise or fall on Israel’s current belief, behavior, or spiritual condition. That’s not my opinion, that’s the entire argument of Romans 11. “Concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers.” (Romans 11:28) Not because they are currently standing. Not because they are believing. Because of the covenant. “For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Romans 11:29) Irrevocable means it is not dependent on timing, performance, or human alignment. Otherwise it wouldn’t be irrevocable. You say they are not currently standing. Paul already said that. “They were broken off because of unbelief.” (Romans 11:20) But you stop there, while Paul keeps going. “God is able to graft them in again.” (Romans 11:23) And then he tells you this hard truth: “Blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.” (Romans 11:25) That means their current state is not proof of disqualification. It is part of God’s plan. So quoting: “Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit” (Zechariah 4:6) doesn’t weaken the argument, it strengthens it. Because if it’s not by man, then it’s not dependent on whether Israel today is secular, spiritual, or anything in between. It’s dependent on God keeping what He promised. And God already told you how this ends: “And so all Israel will be saved.” (Romans 11:26) That is not man forcing fulfillment. That is God finishing what He started. So no, I’m not misrepresenting you. I’m showing that your own premise, that man does not fulfill covenant, actually dismantles your conclusion. Because if God alone fulfills it, then Israel’s current unbelief cannot cancel what God swore to Abraham. That’s not confusion. That’s consistency with Scripture.

@TimRayWV @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin 5. Please. Stop. Putting. Words. In. My. Mouth. You’re repeatedly listening with your thumbs, brother. “So he said to me, “This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says the Lord Almighty.” Zechariah 4:6 NIV

If you're curious how zionism is a warped ideology born in the 1800's, not the bible, this is a speedy summary that most people are clueless about. The truth shall set you free. Deception may lead to nuclear war. @JohnMappin johnmappin.substack.com/p/the-theology…

The hope of salvation in Christ is inseparable from the covenant God made with Abraham because the gospel itself flows out of that promise. God did not introduce salvation in the New Testament as something new or disconnected. He announced it in advance through Abraham. “​In you all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.” (Genesis 12:3) That was not just a national promise, it was the foundation of redemption for the entire world. Paul makes this explicit: “​The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand…” (Galatians 3:8) So the gospel did not start with Christ’s coming, it was promised through Abraham and fulfilled in Christ. Without that covenant: There is no promised “seed” “To Abraham and his Seed were the promises made… and to your Seed, who is Christ.” (Galatians 3:16) Jesus is not random in history. He is the direct fulfillment of the Abrahamic promise. Remove the covenant, and you remove the very lineage and legal promise through which the Messiah comes. There is no framework for justification by faith Abraham himself is the model: “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” (Romans 4:3) That is the same pattern of salvation we have today. Faith was established in the covenant before the law ever existed. There is no inclusion of the Gentiles The promise always included the nations: “In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” (Genesis 12:3) Your salvation as a Gentile is not a separate plan. It is the fulfillment of that original covenant. There is no covenantal faithfulness of God to stand on If God could revoke what He promised to Abraham, then there is no guarantee He would keep what He promises in Christ. But Scripture says: “For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Romans 11:29) Your assurance of salvation is rooted in the fact that God keeps covenant. So the reality is this: The covenant with Abraham is not a side note, it is the root of the gospel Christ is the promised Seed of that covenant And salvation for both Jew and Gentile is the fulfillment of what God swore to Abraham Take away that covenant, and you don’t just weaken the gospel, you remove its foundation.

@TimRayWV @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin I’m not responding to this. Please read the entire thread. Hear what is actually being presented to you. Then & only then respond to what is being presented, not a twisted version you’re creating to respond to. Thank you

You’re bringing together a number of important passages, but the issue is not whether they are true, it’s how they are being applied together. Everything you quoted from Galatians, Romans, Philippians, and Ephesians is absolutely correct in showing that: 1. Salvation is by faith 2. Identity in Christ is spiritual, not based on lineage 3. Jews and Gentiles are united in one body There is no disagreement there. However, none of those passages say that God has ended His covenant relationship with Israel as a people. That conclusion is being assumed, not stated. In fact, in the very section you referenced, Romans 11, Paul is addressing that exact question. After explaining unbelief, faith, and grafting, he asks: “Has God cast away His people? Certainly not!” (Romans 11:1) So whatever conclusions we draw from Galatians 3 or Romans 9 must be consistent with that clear statement. You mentioned that branches are cut off in unbelief and must be grafted in again. That is correct. But notice what Paul still calls them: “the natural branches” (Romans 11:21) That language only makes sense if there remains a distinction between Israel and the Gentiles who are grafted in. Also, when Paul says: “All Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26) he has already been distinguishing Israel from the Gentiles throughout the chapter. So it is difficult to redefine “Israel” in that verse as simply the church without collapsing the distinction he just maintained. Regarding Galatians 3:16 and the “seed,” Paul is emphasizing that the promise is fulfilled in Christ. But a few verses later, he says believers become heirs in Christ, not that the original recipients of the promise cease to exist as a people in God’s plan. So both truths are held together: 1. The promise is fulfilled in Christ 2. Access to that promise is through faith 3. Yet God’s covenantal relationship with Israel is not described as revoked Finally, when Paul says: “For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Romans 11:29) that statement comes after acknowledging Israel’s current unbelief. So whatever “irrevocable” means, it cannot depend on their present faithfulness. In summary: Your points about faith, unity, and identity in Christ are biblically sound. But they do not negate Paul’s equally clear teaching that God has not cast away Israel and still has a future purpose for them. The challenge is not choosing one set of verses over another, but allowing all of them to stand together without forcing one to cancel the other.

@TimRayWV @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin 2. “If your interpretation were correct, that statement would be unnecessary” Hear to understand. Don’t read to respond. Ears to hear, brother Tim.

@Zachonearth It wasn’t AI, like the nut podcasters are claiming?

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s first in-person press conference since the war began. Here’s how it looked from my seat:

@hodgetwins @WhiteHouse I thought he was dead!

@WhiteHouse Did Netanyahu give this order?

“If Iran shots and violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue. We are locked and loaded and ready to go. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” - President DONALD J. TRUMP

@jacksonhinklle Stop believing the propaganda. Are you this stupid???

🚨🇮🇱 Wait, Netanyahu might actually be dead...

@hodgetwins Genesis 27:29 “Cursed be everyone who curses you, And blessed be those who bless you!”

Man fuck Israel and fuck Netanyahu

You’re mixing truth with error, and that’s why it sounds convincing. Yes, no one stands in the olive tree except by faith in Christ. That’s not the debate. Paul already established that. But you’re taking that truth and using it to erase what Paul explicitly refuses to erase. “Has God cast away His people? Certainly not!” (Romans 11:1) If your interpretation were correct, that statement would be unnecessary. Paul would have simply said Israel is now redefined as the church. He didn’t. You say Galatians 3 defines Romans 11, but Romans 11 is Paul explaining the current and future condition of Israel after Christ. That’s already post-cross theology. And he says this: “Blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.” (Romans 11:25) That is not a dissolved identity. That is a temporarily hardened people. Then he makes it unmistakable: “And so all Israel will be saved.” (Romans 11:26) You cannot turn that into “the church” without doing violence to the text, because Paul has been contrasting Israel and Gentiles the entire chapter. And then he seals it: “Concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers.” (Romans 11:28) Not were beloved. Are beloved. “For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Romans 11:29) Irrevocable does not mean fulfilled and transferred. It means not taken back. Now to your claim about modern Israel being secular and not covenant Israel. Spiritually, no one is in covenant apart from Christ. That’s true for Jew and Gentile alike. But Paul never bases God’s covenant faithfulness on their current spiritual condition. In fact, he says the opposite, that even in unbelief, they remain elect because of the fathers. So your argument collapses here: You are making their unbelief the reason God’s covenant no longer applies, while Paul says their unbelief is temporary and does not cancel the covenant. You’re right about one thing: One root One people One way, faith But Paul never says one identity. He maintains both truths at the same time: Gentiles are grafted in by faith Israel remains the natural branches God will restore “God is able to graft them in again.” (Romans 11:23) If they were no longer distinct, that statement is meaningless. You’re not hearing to understand, you’re filtering Romans 11 through Galatians 3 instead of letting both speak. The truth is not either or, it is both: Salvation is only through Christ And God is not finished with Israel If your theology requires you to redefine Israel, ignore “irrevocable,” and explain away “all Israel will be saved,” then it’s not Paul that needs correcting.

@TimRayWV @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin You’re skipping over the full counsel of His word to protect a distinction Paul himself resolves…& isn’t even the point here, brother. Answer the attachment.

You can’t use Galatians 3 to cancel out Romans 11, because Scripture does not contradict itself, it builds on itself. Galatians 3 is about how someone is justified and becomes part of the family of God. Paul makes it clear that salvation is by faith, not by the law, and that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek in terms of access to salvation. That is a statement about spiritual equality in Christ, not the erasing of distinctions or God’s prior promises. Romans 11 is addressing a completely different issue. Paul is explaining God’s ongoing relationship with Israel as a people. He explicitly says: “Has God cast away His people? Certainly not!” (Romans 11:1) Then he goes further: “The gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Romans 11:29) And he uses the olive tree analogy to show that: Gentiles are grafted in Natural branches (Israel) are not permanently removed God is able to graft them in again If Galatians 3 meant what you’re claiming, Paul wouldn’t turn around in Romans 11 and reaffirm Israel’s future and God’s covenant faithfulness. Galatians answers how you are saved Romans 11 answers what God is doing with Israel Those are not competing ideas, they are complementary. Trying to use one to erase the other is not interpretation, it’s contradiction.

@TimRayWV @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin That conclusion doesn’t follow the evidence you’re using. You say “absolutely”, while driving a narrative His word explicitly rebuttals all by itself. You say “don’t cherry pick”, while cherry picking & then give a wordy equivocation to indirectly affirm your presuppositions.

@Cozmonaut13 @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin Absolutely!

@TimRayWV @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin “Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.” Romans 11:20-21 NIV bible.com/bible/111/rom.…

@Cozmonaut13 @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin I believe this also helps explain what we’re seeing right now. People we once believed were Christians are now revealing where they truly stand.

@TimRayWV @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin x.com/cozmonaut13/st…

@Cozmonaut13 @Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin Exactly I believe 2 Thessalonians describes what is happening very well.

@Nero @hodgetwins @dbongino barrettmedia.com/2026/03/06/the…

He actually believed he’d be welcomed back as some kind of hero

@Cozmonaut13 @Candice60896290 @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin @voiceofrabbis @TorahJews Thank you for clarifying, I saw the post and wasn’t sure. 👍

@TimRayWV @Candice60896290 @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin @voiceofrabbis @TorahJews That was a reply to Candice. Not you, Tim. Let’s pursue truth. Holy Spirit gives as He wills, & the Father appoints each a measure. We are called to unity. I believe this moment is from Him, & believe it’s worth engaging fully.

@Cozmonaut13 @Candice60896290 @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin @voiceofrabbis @TorahJews So what exactly is your point in quoting that scripture? Are you trying to say that what I’m saying is unwholesome or inappropriate?

@Candice60896290 @TimRayWV @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin @voiceofrabbis @TorahJews “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.” Ephesians 4:29 NIV bible.com/bible/111/eph.…

@Pete_Hutter @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin x.com/timraywv/statu…

@TimRayWV @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin 7/Christ took the church as His bride. God is not a bigamist, He has no other. The old covenant was with a serial adulteress, and she received the adulteress’s punishment, death, in 70AD. These people are irrelevant, and you don’t get to share your inheritance with them.

So what you’re really saying is you don’t believe Scripture. And if that’s the case, then claiming to love God doesn’t line up with your actions. You can’t say you love God while rejecting what He has revealed. Loving Him means honoring what He honors and aligning yourself with His truth, not dismissing it when it’s inconvenient.

You’re not making a point, you’re playing a game of distortion. Dan Bongino never claimed there were zero Epstein related documents in existence. What he pushed back on was the idea of some secret, explosive “client list” being hidden that would suddenly expose everything people want it to. That’s very different from saying there are no Epstein files at all. There are thousands of pages of records, flight logs, court filings, depositions, victim testimony, much of it already public. The real issue has never been whether documents exist. It’s whether people are willing to accept that the evidence doesn’t match the narrative they’ve already decided to believe. So instead of dealing with that distinction, you twist his words into something he didn’t say, then mock the version you invented. That’s not an argument, that’s a strawman. If you want to have a serious discussion, deal with what was actually said, not a caricature of it.

@TimRayWV @CSUNSHINE Is that the same Same Dan Bongino that said there were No Epstein Files. You're becoming a little bit of a joke now.

If it’s true that ‘90% of MAGA’ supports this new war, this letter wouldn’t have 553,000 likes and 54 million views.

@Candice60896290 @Cozmonaut13 @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin @voiceofrabbis @TorahJews I feel sorry for you!

@TimRayWV @Cozmonaut13 @AwakenWithJP @JohnMappin @voiceofrabbis @TorahJews I literally feel sorry for your congregation- How many do you have left..lol

“Jewish” can mean more than one thing: Someone who follows Judaism (beliefs, practices, Torah, etc.) Religious meaning: Someone who follows Judaism (beliefs, practices, Torah, etc.) Cultural / national identity: Someone who identifies as part of the Jewish people, even if not strictly religious Ethnic Jew = bloodline / ancestry Jewish = can refer to religion, culture, or ethnicity depending on context Key distinction: •Ethnic Jew = bloodline / ancestry •Jewish = can refer to religion, culture, or ethnicity depending on context

@TimRayWV @zacharyhunt90 You tell me. If theyre Christian how can they be jewish?

The church is not the "new Israel." Christians are not the "new Jews." There are Gentile believers in Jesus, and there are Jewish believers in Jesus. This is the church. Israel remains a literal nation of ethnic people who God made an unconditional covenant with, and no man's twisting of scripture will change that. This is the truth.